Jump to content


Leopard 2 , most succesful modern NATO MBT ?


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

Husky1 #21 Posted 26 July 2014 - 05:51 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 42454 battles
  • 646
  • [OPI] OPI
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

Cant really gauge successful nowadays, modern tankwarfare is practically long range indirect sniping mostly utilizing external visual identification from a strategic position. 

Regardless it does have the best design, the abrams is ugly. 



badcooky #22 Posted 27 July 2014 - 11:33 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 20309 battles
  • 880
  • [SMP] SMP
  • Member since:
    11-08-2012

Sales volume being the criteria then yes it's very successful .

It's had too little battle time to even judge it's efficacy yet BUT it has performed well when it's had to in the limited amount of service it's had. 


I'm Bad , pleased to meet you !


teisciitb #23 Posted 26 January 2015 - 06:43 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 668 battles
  • 177
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013

to truly determine what tank is the best you would end up with piles of books and papers, data comparisons, etc.

the expression I would use is

                                             "beauty is in the eye of the beholder "

it depends what you're looking for.

I had a friend of mine from the armour/amcav telling me he thought older tanks were better from a crew perspective, because the crew can do all its own maintenance.

he said he disliked the M1 because too much of the general maintenance had to be done by engineers.


 

but then, "each to their own"

I will leave this to you to make up your own mind on the matter


www.corowaswim-in.org - The largest military vehicle gathering in Australia  BE THERE!

9th-15th march 2015 - Corowa, NSW, australia

36th Annual Corowa GPA swim-in and military vehicle gathering

2015 theme - year of the emergency response vehicle/General Motors vehicle
 

2016, 14th to 20thMarch - theme is:  Year of the Tank and year of the chrysler


fluffy723 #24 Posted 05 June 2015 - 03:32 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 690 battles
  • 62
  • Member since:
    05-24-2015

The Lep 2 Has the best gun... So good It was used(export version is shorter with less velocity) For the M1A1... M1A1 also uses British Chobbam armour

(Lower Grade export version again). SO to recap The M1 has the second best armour... the second/third best gun.. And an engine so thirsty 

You need to follow It around with 4 fuel tankers..... We use it in AUS because we operate with the U.S. a lot and they gave us a deal

that was hard to beat.... Not like we will ever have ANY kind of tank battles here.....

It Is not really possible ATM to really determine who has the best MBT in the world but in my humle opinion,

The top contenders are... Lep 2, M1A2, challenger or that Israli tank who's name I can't remember how to spell.... 

The order is down to personal pref or operational requirements....


Edited by fluffy723, 05 June 2015 - 03:32 PM.

 

 

               Not good or cool enough to have one...:facepalm: Lucky I like red  


mttspiii #25 Posted 06 June 2015 - 01:20 PM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 32703 battles
  • 17,124
  • [PVP] PVP
  • Member since:
    04-15-2012

View Postfluffy723, on 05 June 2015 - 03:32 PM, said:

The Lep 2 Has the best gun... So good It was used(export version is shorter with less velocity) For the M1A1... M1A1 also uses British Chobbam armour

(Lower Grade export version again). SO to recap The M1 has the second best armour... the second/third best gun.. And an engine so thirsty 

You need to follow It around with 4 fuel tankers..... We use it in AUS because we operate with the U.S. a lot and they gave us a deal

that was hard to beat.... Not like we will ever have ANY kind of tank battles here.....

It Is not really possible ATM to really determine who has the best MBT in the world but in my humle opinion,

The top contenders are... Lep 2, M1A2, challenger or that Israli tank who's name I can't remember how to spell.... 

The order is down to personal pref or operational requirements....

 

Merkava IV?

 

Opinion on the new Russian MBT then?


I'm fierce and I'm feeling mighty,

I'm a golden girl, I'm an Aphrodite

 

 


Kyokushin_TrIp #26 Posted 18 August 2015 - 05:12 PM

    Sent to in-game Coventry, forever!

  • Beta-Tester
  • 33022 battles
  • 451
  • Member since:
    04-13-2012

There are many good MBT's in the present day:

 

Russia: T90SM

Germany: Leopard 2A6/A7

Great Britain: Challenger 2

America: M1A2 SEP

Israeli: Merkava IV

Chinese: VT-4 MBT-3000

South Korea: K2 Black Panther

 

Comparing the tanks face to face is no point though.

Reason why, the tank battles are not like WW2. In WW2 the tanks armour and gun had a huge rule in how the tanks performed.

Present day, all the tanks are MBT's. It does not really depend which one is using what gun or what armour, as the armour of all tanks are not build to absorb hits from another tank.

The tanks of present day cannot take a full hit from another tank, they will be disabled after received 1 hit.

It is all about who fires first in the present.

 

 

 

 


Edited by TrIpMo, 18 August 2015 - 05:16 PM.

Wot EU Beta tester name: TrIpMo || WOT NA Player name: TrIpMo || WOT EU Player name: ThaTrip || WOT SEA Player name: KyokushinTrIp <-- active


Computer Specs: Corsair Obsidian 550D || Seasonic M12II 620W Bronze Evo Edition || Asus Maximus Hero VII Formula || Intel I7 4790K || Coolermaster Hyper 212X || Gigabyte GTX980 G1 Gaming 4Gb || Samsung SSD 840 EVO 250Gb || 3Tb Black Western Digital 7200rpm SATA || 16Gb RAM DDR3 G-Skill RipJawX 2400 / C11 || 27" 4k LCD Screen Overlord Tempest X270OC || Windows 10 64bits

(if I don't reply, that is because I got a permanent chat ban. Still waiting for my special decal)
 

 


MagicalFlyingFox #27 Posted 18 August 2015 - 05:22 PM

    Destroyer of Tier 6 CW

  • Beta-Tester
  • 34228 battles
  • 13,679
  • [FLSBK] FLSBK
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

Too many variables to even judge it based on that.

Location, targeting system, terrain, weather, crew, reactive armour, sloping... etc. 
And then you have the air support, ground support, etc...


http://www.theuselessweb.com/

 A. Guy on 02 June 2018 - 12:40 AM, said:

Destroyer of Tier 6 CW... says it all about you.


Inglorious_Aussie_Tanker #28 Posted 19 August 2015 - 07:14 AM

    Major

  • Member
  • 10950 battles
  • 3,929
  • Member since:
    01-18-2015

i would imagine the Best tank would be the One that has Been in the most battles/wars with the best survival rate?  Sales Numbers don't a Great Tank make.  If your Tank can't survive a Battle against an Enemies Tank, then what good is it?

Going off that criteria, I would assume possibly the Centurian, would fit best as it was used on many battle fronts, by many nations and modified and improved appon through Battle experience.  

Or I guess the other contender would be the Russian T72 or maybe the Abrams but I don't think it would have fought in as many battles.

Thoughts?


Vote NOW, to Wall up the Lakeville Valley Pass.

So Many Idiots.

So little Shells.


Kyokushin_TrIp #29 Posted 19 August 2015 - 09:04 AM

    Sent to in-game Coventry, forever!

  • Beta-Tester
  • 33022 battles
  • 451
  • Member since:
    04-13-2012

View PostInglorious_[edited]_Aust, on 19 August 2015 - 07:14 AM, said:

i would imagine the Best tank would be the One that has Been in the most battles/wars with the best survival rate?  Sales Numbers don't a Great Tank make.  If your Tank can't survive a Battle against an Enemies Tank, then what good is it?

Going off that criteria, I would assume possibly the Centurian, would fit best as it was used on many battle fronts, by many nations and modified and improved appon through Battle experience.  

Or I guess the other contender would be the Russian T72 or maybe the Abrams but I don't think it would have fought in as many battles.

Thoughts?

 

We are talking about modern NATO MBT's.

But if we would fit this logic into the modern MBT's. The without doubt the Challenger 2 would be the most succesful then.

I quote you on this "One that has Been in the most battles/wars with the best survival rate"

The Challenger 2 is the only modern MBT that never had serious damage during operations, except the friendly fire incident.

"To date, the only weapon to do any serious damage to a Challenger 2 was another Challenger 2 tank in a 'blue on blue' (friendly fire) incident, that being the only time the tank has ever been seriously damaged during operations."

 

 

 


Edited by TrIpMo, 19 August 2015 - 09:05 AM.

Wot EU Beta tester name: TrIpMo || WOT NA Player name: TrIpMo || WOT EU Player name: ThaTrip || WOT SEA Player name: KyokushinTrIp <-- active


Computer Specs: Corsair Obsidian 550D || Seasonic M12II 620W Bronze Evo Edition || Asus Maximus Hero VII Formula || Intel I7 4790K || Coolermaster Hyper 212X || Gigabyte GTX980 G1 Gaming 4Gb || Samsung SSD 840 EVO 250Gb || 3Tb Black Western Digital 7200rpm SATA || 16Gb RAM DDR3 G-Skill RipJawX 2400 / C11 || 27" 4k LCD Screen Overlord Tempest X270OC || Windows 10 64bits

(if I don't reply, that is because I got a permanent chat ban. Still waiting for my special decal)
 

 


Inglorious_Aussie_Tanker #30 Posted 19 August 2015 - 11:24 AM

    Major

  • Member
  • 10950 battles
  • 3,929
  • Member since:
    01-18-2015

A MBT that hasn't seen Battle against other Tanks is nothing more than expensive TARGET shooter.  It's like comparing CARS on stats alone without actually driving them.

 

What about the Murkova, the Israelies MBT?  The Abrams was involved in some (admittedly fairly 1 sided) Tank battles in Iraq.  I'm not sure about the Deployment of the Russian T80 or T90's, but didn't they face some of their own equipment in Afganistan when fighting there?

 

It begs the question though, what is the most Successful Tank to Date?

Russian T34?  Still being fielded in some small countries.


Vote NOW, to Wall up the Lakeville Valley Pass.

So Many Idiots.

So little Shells.


terminator999 #31 Posted 19 August 2015 - 12:59 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 24778 battles
  • 822
  • [EYRIE] EYRIE
  • Member since:
    10-09-2014

As tank battles nowadays are usually between two countries with little tactics or resources you can't really devise a tanks effectiveness by combat. However the Leopard 2 is widely used and revolutionary. Not "best" but effective and widely-used.


 

signature.png

 

 


kickim #32 Posted 19 August 2015 - 03:29 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 54635 battles
  • 706
  • [FUNI] FUNI
  • Member since:
    05-12-2013

We in SG bot a bunch of them in recent years, about 60 or so officially (but I suspect the contract could be up to a 100). Looks great but very boxy with the additional reactive armor, much better than those old AMX 13s we inherited from the Israelis.

 

Anyway, dun think we'll ever see another tank battle in our lifetime due to air superiority so I guess the point is moot.

Even manned aircrafts are at risk of being phased out soon. Next war will be fought on the horizon, beyond visual range, with missiles and drones... maybe in the aftermath, sorta in a Mad max kind of setting we might see the old tanks roll out.



mttspiii #33 Posted 19 August 2015 - 09:18 PM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 32703 battles
  • 17,124
  • [PVP] PVP
  • Member since:
    04-15-2012

View PostInglorious_[edited]_Aust, on 19 August 2015 - 07:14 AM, said:

i would imagine the Best tank would be the One that has Been in the most battles/wars with the best survival rate?  Sales Numbers don't a Great Tank make.  If your Tank can't survive a Battle against an Enemies Tank, then what good is it?

Going off that criteria, I would assume possibly the Centurian, would fit best as it was used on many battle fronts, by many nations and modified and improved appon through Battle experience.  

Or I guess the other contender would be the Russian T72 or maybe the Abrams but I don't think it would have fought in as many battles.

Thoughts?

 

Depends on whose perspective it is. From an arms dealer's perspective, a Great Tank is one with the worst survival rate, since it makes sure that you have a repeat customer. The Great Tank should still be very 'killy' though, to ensure that you have a customer to repeat purchase in the first place.

I'm fierce and I'm feeling mighty,

I'm a golden girl, I'm an Aphrodite

 

 


Innocent_Civilian #34 Posted 20 August 2015 - 06:17 AM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 28336 battles
  • 118
  • [_COC_] _COC_
  • Member since:
    12-18-2012

View Postterminator999, on 19 August 2015 - 04:59 AM, said:

As tank battles nowadays are usually between two countries with little tactics or resources you can't really devise a tanks effectiveness by combat. However the Leopard 2 is widely used and revolutionary. Not "best" but effective and widely-used.

 

Tanks are still effective in urban combat. Air superiority is fine in open terrain, but it is still very hard to manuever aircraft when there are a lot of obstacles like buildings, etc.

 

Air superiority is overrated since the vaunted high tech jet planes venerated by the almighty superpowers are not really tested against effective anti-air capabilities of modern armies.

 

All that "shock and awe" hooplah was basically between one country with up-to-date aircraft and weaponry against some third world country armed with cold war relics.

 

 



Weebl #35 Posted 20 August 2015 - 09:38 AM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 15027 battles
  • 1,442
  • [PYRO] PYRO
  • Member since:
    12-21-2012

View PostInnocent_Civilian, on 20 August 2015 - 10:17 AM, said:

 

Tanks are still effective in urban combat. Air superiority is fine in open terrain, but it is still very hard to manuever aircraft when there are a lot of obstacles like buildings, etc.

 

Tanks have never been effective in urban combat. 

 

All it takes is a 17 year old with a few weeks training, a bottle, some petrol, a rag and a match and your million dollar tank and highly trained crew go bye byes. 

 

Tanks never enter urban areas without infantry support. 



Innocent_Civilian #36 Posted 20 August 2015 - 01:20 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 28336 battles
  • 118
  • [_COC_] _COC_
  • Member since:
    12-18-2012

View PostWeebl1, on 20 August 2015 - 01:38 AM, said:

 

Tanks have never been effective in urban combat. 

 

All it takes is a 17 year old with a few weeks training, a bottle, some petrol, a rag and a match and your million dollar tank and highly trained crew go bye byes. 

 

Tanks never enter urban areas without infantry support. 

 

Really, not effective in urban environment? Then can you explain to me why the military ALWAYS uses armored columns in cities if possible? Even the police does the same.

 

As for molotov cocktails, they are only effective against open-top vehicles or if you manage to get near enough an engine vent or something. Otherwise, it's useless. Tanks are made of steel, it takes quite abit of heat to destroy it, petrol fire don't burn that hot. That tactics works only in films. 

 

Think about it, if poorly trained 17 year olds with petrol bombs are so effective against tanks then more countries would be employing them in their anti-armor strategy, yet in reality, it is usually used as a last desperate resort.

 

Tanks don't go anywhere WITHOUT support, why do think armored divisions have infantry with them?



Weebl #37 Posted 20 August 2015 - 01:47 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 15027 battles
  • 1,442
  • [PYRO] PYRO
  • Member since:
    12-21-2012

An armoured column does not just consist of tanks, it also contains APCs which are full off embedded supporting infantry. 

 

The Molotov was just an example, a tank in a city cannot on its own give itself adequate all round defence to prevent infantry getting close enough to take it out with a Molotov to the engine deck, an IED or grenade to the tracks to immobilise it etc etc. 

 

If you send a tank force, unsupported by infantry into a built up area which is defended by infantry, it will lose. 

 

Please don't start telling me my experiences come from films. I spent most of my adult life in the military, initially infantry (as a Milan anti tank operator) and then in the Air Force. 

 

Ask any armour commander if he likes fighting in urban environments, the answer will be no because FIBUA is not what tanks are good at

 

 



Innocent_Civilian #38 Posted 20 August 2015 - 08:15 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 28336 battles
  • 118
  • [_COC_] _COC_
  • Member since:
    12-18-2012

View PostWeebl1, on 20 August 2015 - 05:47 AM, said:

An armoured column does not just consist of tanks, it also contains APCs which are full off embedded supporting infantry. 

 

The Molotov was just an example, a tank in a city cannot on its own give itself adequate all round defence to prevent infantry getting close enough to take it out with a Molotov to the engine deck, an IED or grenade to the tracks to immobilise it etc etc. 

 

If you send a tank force, unsupported by infantry into a built up area which is defended by infantry, it will lose. 

 

Please don't start telling me my experiences come from films. I spent most of my adult life in the military, initially infantry (as a Milan anti tank operator) and then in the Air Force. 

 

Ask any armour commander if he likes fighting in urban environments, the answer will be no because FIBUA is not what tanks are good at

 

 

 

Not if you blast those buildings with WP rounds or something much sinister, unless somebody invoke the Geneva Conventions.

 

Again, never claimed that tanks are sent unsupported but you seem fixated on that point for some reason.

 

As for defense, of course a tank is not full proof, nothing truly is. There is no such thing as an invincible tank, but in order to take out a one tank still requires multiple infantry units, and with all the gadgetry modern tanks nowadays have installed, it would be a very bloody business.

 

As you said, with you having military experience, yoy should have an idea of what kind of effort would be needed to take out a tank and I am sure no military instructor ever lectured about it being weak against 17 year old teenager with petrol bombs. Heck, if that was even close to the truth then tank loses would be really atrocious.

 

If you look only at demerits, then any type of terrain would be unsuitable for tank combat, also when asking tank commanders about such things would result in them stating their preferred scenario, and would be closely related on their tanks capabilities on a certain location.

 

 



Weebl #39 Posted 21 August 2015 - 06:22 AM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 15027 battles
  • 1,442
  • [PYRO] PYRO
  • Member since:
    12-21-2012
My whole argument was against your assertation that tanks are effective in urban combat. They are not. Infantry is effective in urban combat, tanks can be effective as support for that infantry, in certain situations, and generally only in assymetric warfare.

Blasting buildings into rubble just provides more hard cover for infantry, it does not deny them cover.

Kyokushin_TrIp #40 Posted 21 August 2015 - 11:52 AM

    Sent to in-game Coventry, forever!

  • Beta-Tester
  • 33022 battles
  • 451
  • Member since:
    04-13-2012

View PostWeebl1, on 21 August 2015 - 06:22 AM, said:

My whole argument was against your assertation that tanks are effective in urban combat. They are not. Infantry is effective in urban combat, tanks can be effective as support for that infantry, in certain situations, and generally only in assymetric warfare.

Blasting buildings into rubble just provides more hard cover for infantry, it does not deny them cover.

 

Weebl1 +1 for you. You are replying to him and keep your head cool.

I could already see that Innocent_Civilian has no experience, or does not know what he is talking about in his first reply here in this thread. You are still willing to keep replying him, and you remain cool headed. :o


Wot EU Beta tester name: TrIpMo || WOT NA Player name: TrIpMo || WOT EU Player name: ThaTrip || WOT SEA Player name: KyokushinTrIp <-- active


Computer Specs: Corsair Obsidian 550D || Seasonic M12II 620W Bronze Evo Edition || Asus Maximus Hero VII Formula || Intel I7 4790K || Coolermaster Hyper 212X || Gigabyte GTX980 G1 Gaming 4Gb || Samsung SSD 840 EVO 250Gb || 3Tb Black Western Digital 7200rpm SATA || 16Gb RAM DDR3 G-Skill RipJawX 2400 / C11 || 27" 4k LCD Screen Overlord Tempest X270OC || Windows 10 64bits

(if I don't reply, that is because I got a permanent chat ban. Still waiting for my special decal)
 

 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users